Our attitude is greatly dependent on the way
our
education has prepared us to think about reality. Systems of schooling
include
institutionalized education and acquiring knowledge based on a
syllabus, which
itself is based on a predetermined purpose of the schools in the
system. In the
past school systems were founded on religion providing them different
curricula. At that time education was for the sake of itself. The main
reasons
people pursued education and attended schools were to satisfy the
spiritual
quest – athato brahma jijnasa (Vedanta-sutra(1.1.1))
and longing for spiritual development, to uplift oneself,
without livelihood-based motivations for doing so. The prime focus of
modern
education is to acquire necessary knowledge and skills to improve
ability to
learn basic interpersonal communication, literacy skills and earn a
livelihood
for themselves. The three main pillars responsible for this
transformation of
educational systems from spiritual to material are: (1) Francis Bacon’s
campaign
of “power/control over nature”, (2) Descartes’ epistemology – science
can ‘make
us masters and possessors of nature’, and (3) Darwinian’s objective
evolutionary biology.

Francis
Bacon (1561–1626) was one of the
prominent personalities in natural philosophy and in the subject matter
of
scientific methodology during the shift from the Renaissance to the
beginning
of modern era. Bacon discussed questions of ethics (Essays)
in his works
on natural philosophy (The Advancement of Learning).[1]He criticized Plato, Aristotle, humanists and
Renaissance scholars such as Paracelsus and Bernardino Telesio. Bacon,
in his
systematic structure of the disciplines in theAdvancement
of Learning(1605),
rejects the book learning of
the humanists, on the grounds that they ‘hunt more after words than
matter’
(Bacon, III [1887], 283).[2]
Furthermore, he carps about the Cambridge University curriculum for
giving importance
on dialectical and sophistical training (Bacon, III [1887], 326).[3]
Thus Bacon reformulated and altered Aristotle’s conception of science
as
knowledge of necessary causes. Rejecting Aristotle’s logic (which is
based on
his metaphysical theory), Bacon assumed that our sensual experience
(things as
theyappear),
automatically presents things
as they are to our understanding. Bacon pursued his work on natural
philosophy
and brought back the concepts of Pre-Socratic philosophers, especially
the
atomists, and among them, Democritus, as the leading figures. Bacon
gave
preferences to Democritus’ natural philosophy and thus dismissed
Aristotle’s
deductive logic and belief in authorities. Bacon rejects any approach
based on
tradition to start with and believes in a direct investigation of
nature and
then to ascend to empirical and general knowledge.[4]
For Bacon the value of power and utility is so immense that frequently
truth,
power and utility become identical concepts in his understanding. Bacon
stated
in Novum Organum,[5]

“Truth,
therefore, and utility, are here perfectly identical, and effects are
of more
value as pledges of truth than from the benefit they confer on man...
There is
a most intimate connection between the ways of human power and human
knowledge... and that which is most useful in practice is most correct
in
theory.”

The great scientist of the seventeenth century,
Newton,
developed the mechanistic concept of reality in science by deriving
inspiration
from Bacon’s work. This has caused a shift from harmonious organic or
wholistic
word view to dangerous mechanistic worldview of reductionism. Bourdeau
stated,

“For Bacon we
must subdue nature, penetrate its secrets and chain it to satisfy our
desires.
Man is the center of the world and the object of science is to dominate
nature.”[6]

In the past nature was seen as a worshipable
divine
gift of God and after Bacon’s campaign all that has changed. Bourdeau
futher stated,[7]

“… Now nature is
threatened by man who has become detached from it. Technology has
endowed
humans with the power of a major geological agency, which may act on a
continental or even planetary scale (e.g. acid rain, photochemical
smog,
radioactive contamination, stratospheric ozone depletion, climate
change).

“These man-made
environmental problems cannot all be solved by technology alone.
Changes in
human behaviour are necessary, hence the need for codes of conduct
based on the
ethics of the environment. The relationship between man and nature must
be
reconsidered.”

Bacon’s
mechanistic science is further strengthened by Rene Descartes’ (1596 –
1650) dualistic
philosophy – Cartesian duality. In the Cartesian view, to make sure
that we
believe only what is authentically definite, we must first knowingly
reject all
of the confidently held but debatable beliefs we have formerly acquired
by
experience and education. Separateness of the physical and mental
reality was
established by Descartes theory of perception and his famous cogito ergo sum – ‘I think, therefore I
am.’ For Descartes the power of the human mind/reason is central to
science. By
exercising the mind for understanding nature, one can obtain scientific
knowledge and hence can become the master and possessor of nature.
Descartes
explained that man must overcome the slavery to nature and by
developing the
knowledge of nature man can make nature useful to men. Thus Descartes
established a mechanistic understanding of reality by proposing nature
as a bag
of tools ready for any human purposes. In Descartes view we were
considered to
be sitting dualistically outside the world discovering the laws of
physics to direct
them towards our own purposes.

Descartes explained that human beings are made
up of
two things: res extensae (corporeal
body, physicochemical, material and tangible entity) and res
cogitans (metaphysical mind–non-corporeal, intangible,
immaterial entity unavailable for empirical examination by any
observational
natural science). However, he could not provide a convincing
explanation on how
something non-physical could be intimately related with something
physical. Descartes’
dualistic view is like a ‘ghost in a machine’, but he was not sure how
a ghost
can control the machine. In addition to this mind-body dualism,
Descartes also
explained that animals are completely distinct from humans because he
believed
that animals don’t have res cogitans –
‘thinking substance’. For Descartes animals are organic automata
(machines),
which are much more fabulous than artificial ones, but machines
nonetheless. Gaukroger[8]stated,

“Descartes
completely reshapes the relation between metaphysics and natural
philosophy,
and develops the first mechanist physical cosmology,… the first
mechanist
physiology and embryology, the first mechanist account of animal
sentience …”

In Introduction
to Animal Rights,[9]
Gary Francione describes the anticipated consequences of the Cartesian
view:

“Descartes and
his followers performed experiments in which they nailed animals by
their paws
onto boards and cut them open to reveal their beating hearts. They
burned,
scalded, and mutilated animals in every conceivable manner. When the
animals
reacted as though they were suffering pain, Descartes dismissed the
reaction as
no different from the sound of a machine that was functioning
improperly. A
crying dog, Descartes maintained, is no different from a whining gear
that
needs oil.”

Following Descartes physics started developing
based
on the mechanistic Cartesian world view, and on that foundation the
principles
of Newtonian physics retained their strong authority in Western
scientific
thinking. Even though Descartes’ straightforward mechanistic biology
was revised
significantly, the faith that all features of living organisms can be
explained
by reducing them to their smallest constituents, and the mechanisms
through
which these interact, forms the foundation of evolutionary biology
developed by
Charles Darwin (1809 – 1882) and his faithful followers.In biology, the Cartesian
view of living
organisms as machines made from distinct parts, provided the central
conceptual
framework until the last few decades of the 20th
Century. Clear evidence
of the mechanistic view of reductionism in biology can be sensed from
this statement
of a textbook on modern biology: “One of
the acid tests of understanding an object is the ability to put it
together
from its component parts. Ultimately, molecular biologists will attempt
to
subject their understanding of cell structure and function to this sort
of test
by trying to synthesize a cell.”[10]

Under the command of Captain Robert FitzRoy,
the HMS
Beagle set sail in 1831, with British naturalist Darwin on board. In
this
voyage, serving as a naturalist, Darwin studied the geographic
distribution of
plants and animals in terms of the uniformitarian geology based on
Charles
Lyell’s published Principles of Geology.
The patterns of extinct fossil forms and extant life gave Darwin an
impression
that some natural and gradual process that involved migration and
adaptation to
local environments had taken effect, rather than some act of inimitable
or extraordinary
creation of God. Thus he tried to come up with a general
rationalization for
his observations of the natural world. Influenced by Essay
on the Principle of Population by Thomas Robert Malthus,
Darwin believed that competition for natural resources was a fact of
life and
that populations remained stable as a result of processes that included
checks
and balances. In a struggle for existence, individuals with the most
favorable
characteristics would be favored to survive and reproduce themselves.
Thus,
Darwin claimed that over a large time scale, organisms with favorable
traits
and characters would diverge from their ancestral forms to give rise to
new
species.

In the year 1859 Darwin explained ‘descent with
modification’ by means of ‘natural selection’ in his famous publicationOn the Origin of Species by Means
of Natural
Selection; or, The Preservation of
Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.[11]
Although Darwin had only one line on human evolution in his 1859 book,
his
theory clearly indicated that humans were also subject to the same
mechanistic
process as plants and animals. Thus, this mechanistic theory of natural
selection provided a naturalistic foundation for modern biology by
eliminating
God’s creation and established a nonpurposive view of reality. In a
famous
letter[12]
to his botanist friend Joseph D. Hooker in 1871, Darwin stated “It is often said that all the conditions for
the first production of a living organism are now present which could
ever have
been present. But If (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some
warm
little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light,
heat,
electricity etc. present, that a protein compound was chemically
formed, ready
to undergo still more complex changes at the present such matter would
be
instantly devoured, which would not have been the case before living
creatures
were formed.” Hence, in Darwin’s view, life is nothing but a
majestic
arrangement of atoms and molecules.

Lord Sri Krishna
and Lord Balaram mercifully appeared as two full moons in the form of
Lord
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Lord Nityanada Prabhu to dispel the dense
darkness of
ignorance in this dark age of Kali by
spreading the cooling rays of extreme mercy. In Srimad-Bhagavatam
11.5.32, we find evidence of the advent of Kali-yugaavatar Lord Sri
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and His associates:

Translation: In the age of Kali, persons of great piety and
intelligence will
worship the Lord as Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. He will appear in a
golden form
chanting Krishna’s name, accompanied by His associates and entourage.

Lord Chaitanya appeared
along with His eternal associates 500 years back in Sri Navadwip Dham,
West
Bengal, India and established the congregational chanting or Sankirttan, as the universal religion
for this age of Kali. Lord Nityananda Prabhu appeared in Rada-desa,
Birbhum
District, West Bengal, India. Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu predicted that
his
mercy would spread to every town and village and Lord Chaitanya
Mahaprabhu’s manifesting
potency Lord Nityanda Prabhu, expansively initiated that distributing
function.
Lord Nityananda Prabhu was running after fallen souls, making them
qualified by
giving his causeless mercy and finally sending them to his master Lord
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (the relishing function). Hence, the mercy of
Nityananda
Prabhu is the foundation of devotion to Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Only
by the
mercy of Lord Nityanda one can obtain Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu’s
divine grace.
These two divine functions of Absolute: relishing and distributing
functions
are eternally manifesting in our Gaudiya Sampradaya.

After
500 years of Mahaprabhu’s appearance, distributing and relishing
functions of
Absolute again appeared extensively in the form of Srila A.C. Bhakti
Vedanta
Swami Prabhupada and Srila Bhakti Rakshak Sridhar Dev-Goswami Maharaja.
Fulfilling the prediction of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, in ten short
years, Srila
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada inundated the whole world with
Krishna consciousness.
Srila Prabhupada went to the West in 1965 and distributed Krishna
consciousness
in an extraordinary manner, which is unique in the history of our
Sampradaya. Like
merciful Nityananda Prabhu, Srila Prabhupada ran after the most fallen
souls in
western civilization and made them qualified to accept Krishna
consciousness in
their practicing life. Prior to his divine disappearance from this
mortal world
in 1977, Srila Prabhupada guided his disciples and followers to obtain
further spiritual
guidance from Srila Bhakti Rakshak Sridhar Dev-Goswami Maharaja, whom
he
considered his own siksha Gurudev. Srila Sridhar Maharaja
affectionately
nourished the sincere souls, who approached him following the order of
Srila
Prabhupada. Srila Sridhar Maharaja is world renowned as the guardian of
pure
devotion for his saintly simplicity, affectionate nature and many other
wonderful Vaisnava qualities. He blessed the world with many beautiful
compositions
of spiritual prayers and literature, revealing a devotional stature in
common
with that of the famed Goswamis of Vrindavan.

Srila Prabhupada decided to go to America,
because
whole world (especially India) was following the American mentality.
Srila
Prabhupada thought if America took to Krishna consciousness, other
countries
would simply follow. This was a wonderful vision of Srila Prabhupada
and he
could practically achieve it by convincing the whole world about
Krishna
consciousness in ten short years. However, the scientific community of
the
world did not take up the movement of Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu very
seriously.
As explained before, scientists believe that life can be reduced to
molecules
and in the future, by massive molecular manipulation, they can
successfully
synthesize life in their laboratory. Knowing scientists are the
powerful preachers
of modern materialistic civilization, Srila Prabhupada was very
concerned about
their mentality. To save the world from this dangerous position, Srila
Prabhupada organized a scientific preaching mission ‘Bhaktivedanta
Institute’
under the leadership of Srila Sripad Bhaktisvarupa Damodara Goswami
Maharaja (Srila
Sripad Maharaja, also known as Dr. T.D. Singh). Srila Prabhupada gave
much
energy and special attention for this most important preaching mission
of Lord
Chaitanya Mahaprabhu to defeat materialistic science and to gradually
transform
it into spiritual science. Lord Sri Krishna says in Srimad
Bhagavad-Gita 3.21 that,

Translation: Whatever action is performed by a great man,
common
men follow in his footsteps. And whatever standards he sets by
exemplary acts,
all the world pursues.

In the same lines, Srila Prabhupada envisioned
that,
if the top class man of society, engineers, medical men and scientists
take up the
Krishna Consciousness movement as a scientific movement, following them
common
men will also do the same. Srila Prabhupada said,

“… we have
formed one party of scientists under the leadership of Sriman Svarupa
Damodara
Prabhu. Also we have formed the Bhaktivedanta Institute for organizing
scientific presentations of Krishna Consciousness. This party is our
most
important preaching arm with which we will be able to destroy the bogus
speculation and cheating which goes under the banner of scientific
advancement.

“Therefore I
have got great hope for Svarupa Damodara and his colleagues. I want
them to
travel vigorously throughout the world to lecture in all universities
and other
institutions. There is no lack of financial resources and we shall
spare
nothing to see to this party’s success.”.

The three main members of Srila Prabhupada’s
party of
scientists are Srila Bhaktisvarupa Damodara Goswami Maharaja, Sripad
Bhakti
Madhava Puri Maharaja (Sripad Puri Maharaja) and Sripad Sadaputa
Prabhu. All
the three members are Ph.D. degree holders in different scientific
curricula.
It is explained in Srimad Bhagavatam1.5.22

Translation: Learned circles have positively concluded that
the
infallible purpose of the advancement of knowledge, namely austerities,
study
of the Vedas, sacrifice, chanting of hymns and charity, culminates in
the
transcendental descriptions of the Lord, who is defined in choice
poetry.

In the purport of this verse of Srimad
Bhagavatam Srila Prabhupada says, “When
advancement of knowledge is applied in the service of the Lord,
the whole process becomes absolute. The Personality of Godhead and His
transcendental
name, fame, glory, etc., are all nondifferent from Him. Therefore, all
the
sages and devotees of the Lord have recommended that the subject matter
of art,
science, philosophy, physics, chemistry, psychology and all other
branches of
knowledge should be wholly and solely applied in the service of the
Lord. Art,
literature, poetry, painting, etc., may be used in glorifying the Lord.
The
fiction writers, poets and celebrated litterateurs are generally
engaged in
writing of sensuous subjects, but if they turn towards the service of
the Lord
they can describe the transcendental pastimes of the Lord. Valmiki was
a great
poet, and similarly Vyasadeva is a great writer, and both of them have
absolutely engaged themselves in delineating the transcendental
activities of
the Lord and by doing so have become immortal. Similarly, science and
philosophy also should be applied in the service of the Lord. There is
no use
presenting dry speculative theories for sense gratification. Philosophy
and
science should be engaged to establish the glory of the Lord. Advanced
people
are eager to understand the Absolute Truth through the medium of
science, and
therefore a great scientist should endeavor to prove the existence of
the Lord
on a scientific basis. Similarly, philosophical speculations should be
utilized
to establish the Supreme Truth as sentient and all-powerful. Similarly,
all
other branches of knowledge should always be engaged in the service of
the
Lord. In the Bhagavad-gita also the same is affirmed. All “knowledge”
not
engaged in the service of the Lord is but nescience. Real utilization
of
advanced knowledge is to establish the glories of the Lord, and that is
the
real import. Scientific knowledge
engaged in the service of the Lord and all similar activities are all
factually
hari-kirtana, or glorification of the Lord.”

Srila Prabhupada wanted his scientist disciples
to
engage themselves in such scientific sankirtan under the banner of
Bhaktivedanta Institute. It is described in Srimad
Bhagavad-Gita7.6:

etad-yonini bhutani sarvanity upadharaya

aham krtsnasya jagatah prabhavah pralayas tatha

Translation: All created beings have their source in these
two
natures. Of all that is material and all that is spiritual in this
world, know
for certain that I am both the origin and the dissolution.

Srila Prabhupada wanted to
make scientists understand these teachings of Srimad
Bhagavad-Gita that life is a non-material principle and is
distinct from molecules or matter and that the Supreme Lord is the
source of
both life and matter. To convince the scientists, Srila Prabhupada gave
two
very powerful mantras: (1) Life Comes
From Life, and (2) Matter Comes From
Life. Srila Prabhupada empowered and trained Srila Sripad
Maharaja to
preach expansively the first mantra ‘Life Comes From Life’ and Srila
Prabhupada
gave the task of developing the scientific philosophical understanding
of the
second mantra ‘Matter Comes From Life’ to Sripad Puri Maharaja.

Darwin, the father of modern objective
evolutionary
theory, had suspicions about his own suggested elucidation for the
diversity of
life. He was seriously concerned about the philosophical implications
of his dogma.
According to Darwin, human’s sentient belief producing abilities had
evolved
from purposeless chemicals and the lower animals. Hence, the
reductionistic
view explains that non-rational, random accumulation of molecules
produced
human reasoning ability, which is rational, self-aware, intelligent and
purposive
(teleological) in nature. Obviously this non-rational source for human
rationality
creates valid suspicion about the trustworthiness of human reason.
Furthermore,
the whole emphasis of objective evolution is about species
survivability and hence
cannot explain anything about cultivation of true beliefs. Therefore,
Darwin’s
objective evolution theory fails to provide a practical pathway to
guarantee
that humans developed trustworthy, true beliefs about reality.[13]
This fact is evident from the statement of world renowned biologist
Francis
Crick[14]:
“Our highly developed brains, after all,
were not evolved under the pressure of discovering scientific truth,
but only
to enable us to be clever enough to survive and leave descendents.”
In this
reductionistic view, reliability of true beliefs is founded on
survivability and
hence the truthfulness of human beliefs about reality is highly
uncertain. Following
his own dogma, can Darwin put his confidence in his own beliefs?
Darwin’s
insecure position is very clear from his own statement[15]:

“With me the
horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which
has
been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or
at all
trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind,
if
there are any convictions in such a mind?”

Being ignorant about the foundation of such
imprudent
philosophy, a few extremely overconfident scientists claim that faith
in God, existence
of the soul and morality are mere evolutionarily driven realities which
might
have provided some survival benefits in the distant past. Lawrence
Krauss said,
“Religious belief that the universe is
the handiwork of an all-powerful being is not subject to refutation.
This sort
of reliance on faith may itself have an evolutionary basis. There has
been talk
of a “god gene”: the idea of an early advantage in the struggle for
survival
for those endowed with a belief in a hidden patrimony that gives order,
purpose
and meaning to the universe we experience.”[16]
World renowned atheist of modern times, Richard Dawkins, explains that
religiousness
in human culture is basically an outcome of a defective ‘mental
virus.’[17]
However, these scientists forget that, the very foundation of science
is based
upon humans having trustworthy and true beliefs about reality. If human
beliefs
are product of mutation in an evolutionary development, then they
should
realize that the human belief based scientific claims of scientists are
completely untrustworthy. The foundation of objective evolution theory
suffers
from epistemological incoherence and hence is self-defeating in nature.[18]

Materialists or Mayavadis adopt the above
mentioned defective
process of knowing by argument and reason, which is known as aroha-pantha in Vedantic tradition.
According
to Mayavada philosophy, all living entities are one with Brahman. In
the
similar lines, modern science believes that all living beings are mere
atoms or
molecules. There is no space for distinct individuality within the
monotony of atoms
and molecules in modern science. Hence, modern science is in a sense
modern
Mayavad. On the other hand, men of highest intelligence follow the
perfect process
of knowing or avaroha-pantha –
descending
knowledge or acceptance of parampara
system. It is impossible to teach a Mayavadi or a materialistic
scientist
immediately about the parampara
system or avaroha-pantha. One must
follow the path shown in this regard by Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu
Himself – trinad api sunichena taror iva
sahishnunaamanina manadena kirtaniyah sada harih: “One who is
more humble
than a blade of grass, more tolerant than a tree, respects everyone,
without
desire for respect from anyone, only such a person is qualified to
taste the
sweet nectar of Mahaprabhu’s sankirtan rasa.” These teachings, Lord
Chaitanya
Mahaprabhu Himself practiced in his dealings with leaders of Mayavaids
– Sarvabhauma
Bhattacharya and Prakashananda Saraswati. Like, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, a
scientific preacher must respectfully hear and properly understand the
explanations of scientists, and only with a mood of great humility one
can
explain the deficiencies of those scientific theories in a language
understandable to scientists.

On several occasions, Srila Prabhupada
recognized
Srila Sripad Maharaja as a perfect Vaisnava, because Srila Sripad had
those
qualities (trinad api sunichena taror iva
sahishnunaamanina manadena kirtaniyah sada harih) to taste
and preach the
sweet nectar of Mahaprabhu’s sankirtan rasa in the educated section of
the
society. Following the example of Lord Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, Srila
Prabhupada also wanted that sincere devotees of Lord Chaitanya
Mahaprabhu must
take up the task of preaching to the modern Mayavadis – scientists, in
a most
compassionate attitude under the expert guidance of Srila Sripad
Maharaja. In
1977, prior to his divine departure, Srila Prabhupada said to Srila
Sripad
Maharaja, “The next phase is yours. You
must establish our movement as a genuine scientific movement.”
After successfully
establishing, Krishna consciousness throughout the world Srila
Prabhupada wanted
Krishna consciousness to be accepted scientifically in the highest
academic
circles so that the whole world would understand that Krishna
consciousness is not
simply religious sentiment but the authentic ontological Truth of
Reality. To
fulfill this mission Srila Prabhupada transferred all his potency to
Srila
Sripad Maharaja and highly empowered him to spread scientific sankirtan moment all over the world.

In
1968 addressing faculties
and students at MIT, Srila Prabhupada stated that, although the modern
educational system has so many departments of knowledge, none of them
explain,
what makes the difference between a living body and a dead body. Srila
Prabhupada challenged, if you materialistic scientists are really
competent,
then you should be able to make the dead body alive by injecting the
missing chemicals
in the dead body. However, Srila Prabhupada wanted that devotees should
present
the explanations of ‘Science of the Soul’ from Srimad
Bhagavat-Gita more scientifically to convince the
scientists. Srila Prabhupada instructed Srila Sripad Maharaja, “… when you present more scientifically, then
they will be convinced.”

The ‘spontaneous generation of life’ hypothesis
includes a conspicuous history of unrelenting derision from several
prominent
personalities in science. At various times in its history, ‘spontaneous
generation’ has been identified by two different concepts. They are:
(a)
abiogenesis, and (b) heterogenesis. Abiogenesis is the field of science
dedicated to study how life might have arisen spontaneously for the
first time
from inorganic chemicals. On the other hand, the notion that life can
arise
from dead organic matter, such as the appearance of maggots from
decaying meat,
is known as heterogenesis. For a long time major western thinkers like
Newton,
Harvey, Descartes and von Helmont accepted heterogenesis with full
confidence. Francesco
Redi by his experiments demonstrated that meat placed under a screen of
muslin
never developed maggots. The works of Schulze, Schwann, von Dusch and
Schroeder
provided significant challenges to heterogenesis, and finally in 1864
Louis
Pasteur’s famous swan-neck flask experiment sounded the death knell for
this
theory. Pasteur famously stated that “Never
will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal
blow of
this simple experiment”.[19]

However, soon after establishment of Pasteur’s
famous
biogenesis theory – ‘Life Comes from Life’, the reductionist school
proposed an
even more intricate and incredible form of spontaneous generation –
abiogenesis. This hypothesis gathered its support mainly due to the
collapse of
the false dilemma of organic and inorganic matter (synthesis of urea in
1828 by
Wohler), and the development of the concept of conservation of energy.[20]
The modern form of chemical evolution theory began to develop following
the
proposal by Russian biochemist A.I. Oparin.[21]
According to this claim, complex molecular arrangements and functions
of living
systems evolved from simpler molecules that pre-existed on the
lifeless,
primitive earth. Thus, abiogenesis provided an ideal sense of balance
to the Darwinian
objective evolution theory, requiring billions of years to go from dead
atoms
and molecules to cells, and then, via random mutation or natural
selection,
from cells to the varieties of living beings present today. Following
Oparin,
in 1929 John Haldane proposed that in a reducing primitive atmosphere
and with
a suitable supply of energy, such as lightning or ultraviolet light, a
wide
range of organic compounds might be synthesized.[22]
According to Haldane, the primordial sea was the source of a vast
chemical
laboratory motorized by solar energy. Haldane explained that, in due
course of
time, the sea turned into a ‘hot diluted soup’ containing large
populations of
organic monomers and polymers. The term ‘prebiotic soup’ was coined by
Haldane,
and is well-known as Oparin-Haldane’s view of the origin of life.

In 1953 Stanley Miller[23]
offered experimental support for the theory of prebiotic evolution.
Miller
experimentally produced amino acids such as glycine, alanine, aspartic
acid,
and glutamic acid by passing an electric discharge through a gaseous
mixture of
methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and water vapor. Thus, he suggested that
the
implausible complexity in the molecular organization of living cells
might
someway have been produced from nothing more than simple chemicals
interacting
at random in a primordial ocean. It is suggested by scientists that the
potential resources of energy for primitive cells are heat, chemical,
and light
energies.[24]
However, the major impasse is: how can unguided physical energies
manufacture a
state of such massive complexity and specificity as a living cell?
Srila Sripad
Maharaja in 1973 asked molecular evolutionist Stanley Miller at one of
his
lectures on the origins of life at the University of California,
Irvine, “Suppose, if I were to give you all of
the
ready- made bio- molecules, DNA, proteins, lipids, sugars, etc., will
you be
able to produce life within a test-tube by combining these molecules?”
Miller’s immediate answer was, “I do not
know.”[25]

Srila Prabhupada was extremely pleased to hear
about
this incident. In several lectures and conversations Srila Prabhupada
mentioned
this incident and stated that, our Svarupa Damodar had challenged the
scientist
and defeated the idea that life comes from matter. Referring to this
incident
Srila Prabhupada stated to Srila Sripad Maharaja, “…
you are also scientist, there are other scientists. But your
consciousness is different from theirs. Therefore you could challenge
him like
that: if you can create life by accumulation of these facts? He says
that I do
not know. He is not confident in his science.”

Srila Prabhupada specifically asked Sripad Puri
Maharaja to preach about ‘Matter Comes from Life’. With utmost faith in
his
spiritual master in 1980, Sripad Puri Maharaja approached Professor of
Biology
at Harvard University Nobel Laureate George Wald (1906-1997), who was
still a hardcore
atheist at that time. Professor Wald was having strong faith in the
Darwinian
view of origin of life and it is very much evident from his statement:

“The important
point is that since the origin of life belongs in the category of at
least once
phenomena, time is on its side. However improbable we regard this
event, or any
of the steps which it involves, given enough time it will almost
certainly
happen at-least-once. And for life as we know it, with its capacity for
growth
and reproduction, once may be enough.

“Time is in fact
the hero of the plot. The time with which we have to deal is of the
order of
two billion years. What we regard as impossible on the basis of human
experience is meaningless here. Given so much time, the “impossible”
becomes
possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain.
One has
only to wait: time itself performs the miracles.”[26]

During the meeting, with a simple heart and
strong
faith on the words of his spiritual master, Sripad Puri Maharaja asked
Professor
Wald: Why do you think that life comes from matter? Why don’t you think
opposite, ‘Matter Comes from Life’? Miraculously, this pure deliverance
of mantra
of Srila Prabhupada entered deeply in the heart of Professor Wald. In a
very
short time, Professor Wald completely rejected all his past concepts on
the material
origin of life and became an active supporter of the message of
Bhaktivedanta
Institute – ‘Matter Comes from Life’. His change is very strongly
evident from
his statement:

“Let me say that
it is not only easier to say these things to physicists than to my
fellow
biologists, but easier to say them in India than in the West. For when
I speak
of Mind pervading the universe, of Mind as a creative principle perhaps
primary
to matter, any Hindu will acquiesce, will think, yes, of course, he is
speaking
of Brahman [God].

“That is the
stuff of the universe, mind-stuff; and yes, each of us shares in it.”[27]

In
the photograph Srila Sripad Maharaja and Madhava Das (Brahmachari name
of
Sripad Puri Maharaja) with Professor George Wald, Nobel Laureate in
Physiology
and Medicine, at the Bhaktivedanta Institute campus, Bombay in 1981.

“The
Bhaktivedanta Institute is greatly to be
congratulated for having produced so crucial and productive a
discussion. It
should be given every encouragement and support in going ahead with an
enterprise so well begun.”

– Professor George Wald

Professor Wald actively participated in the
conferences and activities of Bhaktivedanta Institute. He delivered the
key-note address at the ‘First World Congress for the Synthesis of
Science and
Religion’ held in Bombay in 1986 and also participated in the ‘First
International Conference on the Study of Consciousness within Science’
in San
Francisco, 1990.

After the divine departure of Srila Prabhupada,
both
Srila Sripad Maharaja and Sripad Puri Maharaja approached Srila Sridhar
Maharaja for spiritual guidance to carry forward services of
Bhaktivedanta
Institute. Srila Sridhar Maharaja with great love and affection
encouraged the
scientific preaching services envisioned by Srila Prabhupada. Srila
Sridhar
Maharaja mentioned to Srila Sripad Maharaja, Swami Maharaja (Swami is
the
Sanyas title of Srila Prabhupada) gave you the task of building a
temple on the
tomb of the Darwin. In several discourses Srila Sridhar Maharaja
explained that
consciousness is the foundation and its objective content or world is
floating
on it connected by a shadowy medium like mind. These collections of
Srila
Sridhar Maharaj’s taped discourses have been compiled as a unique book:Subjective Evolution of
Consciousness – The
Play of the Sweet Absolute.[28]
This book is an incomparable synthesis of thought from Descartes,
Berkeley and
Hegel in the West to Buddha, Shankara, and Sri Chaitanya in the East to
reveal
the ultimate conception of reality in all its comprehensive beauty and
fulfillment.

Srila Prabhupada, the founder Acharya of the
Bhaktivedanta Institute appointed Srila Sripad Maharaja as the founding
director of institute. Srila Prabhupada instructed Srila Sripad
Maharaja to
organize scientific conferences, and to write books and articles that
scientifically present Krishna Consciousness or Bhagavata Culture. In
Srila Prabhupada’s
presence Srila Sripad Maharaja organized a conference in Vrindavan,
India,
produced literature and delivered lectures at various institutions.
Srila
Sripad Maharaja was the only disciple of Srila Prabhupada to write a book
during Srila Prabhupada’s manifest pastime that Srila Prabhupada
himself
ordered to be printed
and distributed in
mass. The book is entitled, The
Scientific Basis of Krishna Consciousness and is based on
instructions that
Srila Sripad Maharaja had received from Srila Prabhupada. Srila Sripad
Maharaja
offered the book to Srila Prabhupada on his Vyasa Puja day, in Los
Angeles, in
1973. Srila Prabhupada was extremely impressed with the book. Srila
Prabhupada
would often show it to his guests, stating that the book was written by
one of his
scientist disciples. He ordered the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust (BBT) to
publish and
print over 100,000 copies of the book. This book is still being used
extensively for presenting Krishna consciousness to students at
colleges and
universities throughout the world and over a quarter million copies
have been
printed to date. For this purpose it has been translated into many
different
languages.

During the initial period of the Institute,
Srila
Sripad Maharaja was working as a research scientist at Emory University
and therefore
most of the Institute’s major activities were done after Srila
Prabhupada’s departure
from this world. After Srila Prabhupada’s departure, Srila Sripad
Maharaja
underwent a long struggle to establish the Bhaktivedanta Institute’s
activities. This was primarily due to a lack of financial support. In
spite of
the financial obstacles that Srila Sripad Maharaja faced in
establishing the
Bhaktivedanta Institute, it is now a well recognized research and
educational institution.
Srila Prabhupada was eager to have Srila Sripad Maharaja scientifically
present
the ‘Life Comes From Life’ paradigm at colleges and universities around
the
world. Srila Sripad Maharaja’s acceptance of his spiritual master’s
instructions as his life and soul has caused Srila Prabhupada’s vision
of
introducing the Bhagavata Paradigm to the world’s scientists,
intellectuals and
leaders to become a reality. For over three decades, Srila Sripad
Maharaja has
been giving lectures on the spiritually based Bhagavata Paradigm. He
has spoken
on such subjects as Bioethics, Theobiology, Life Comes From Life and
the
Synthesis of Science and Religion at many of the world’s most
prestigious
colleges and universities such as, Stanford University, USA; National
University of Singapore, Singapore; Tehran University, Iran; University
of
Durban, South Africa; Federal University of Campina Grande, Brazil;
Medical
College, Suva, Fiji; Udayana University, Bali, Indonesia; University of
Malaya,
Malaysia; Emory University, Atlanta, USA; Institute for Oriental
Studies, Peru;
National Institute of Medicine, Senigaglia, Italy; the IIT at Bombay,
Kanpur,
Madras, Gauhati, Delhi, Kharagpur; Andhra University, Andhra Pradesh;
University
of Calcutta; University of San Francisco, USA; University of Malaga,
Spain and
Vishva Bharati University, West Bengal.

Srila Sripad Maharaja with Professor Werner
Arber from the University of Basel, Switzerland, Nobel Laureate in
Physiology and Medicine. He is an authority on viruses. Maharaja
visited him a few times in his laboratory in Switzerland to discuss
about life and its Origin. Their dialogue was published in the Journal
of the Bhaktivedanta Institute, Savijnanam.

“I think that life could be
beyond the assembly
of biomolecules.”

– Professor Werner Arber,
Nobel Laureate

Srila Sripad Maharaja with Professor Richard R.
Ernst, Noble Laureate in Chemistry. Professor Ernst contributed an
article on, ‘Science in the Third Millennium: Expectations between Hope
and Fear’ for the Bhaktivedanta Institute’s publication, Thoughts on
Synthesis of Science and Religion.

“Science and
technology alone cannot solve the problems of the new millennium. We
need additional guidelines for our actions, for the selection of our
research projects and research goals. These guidelines have to do with
ethics, with philosophy, and with faith.”

– Professor Richard R. Ernst,
Nobel Laureate

Srila Sripad Maharaja with Professor Charles H.
Townes, Nobel Laureate in Physics, reading the Journal of the
Bhaktivedanta Institute. Professor Townes delivered the key-note
address of the ‘Second World Congress for the Synthesis of Science and
Religion’ held in Calcutta, India, 1997.

“In
India, there is much more union between the
two (science and spirituality) than there is in the West. I think that
the Western scientists are coming back to that point of view - what the
universe is all about. A few scientists are interested and their number
is increasing.”

– Professor Charles H. Townes,
Nobel Laureate

In the name of the
Bhaktivedanta Institute,
Srila
Sripad Maharaja has organized three major conferences and a large
number of
seminars. He has published two important books on the synthesis of
science and
religion and numerous other literatures, which have all received world
wide
acceptance from the academic community. As director of the
Bhaktivedanta
Institute he has interacted with thousands of scholars from around the
globe,
including many Nobel Laureates and leading scientists. Srila Sripad
Maharaja
has authored The Fundamental Principles
of Reincarnation, Theobiology
andWhat is Matter and What is Life?
He
co-edited two major volumes; Synthesis of
Science and Religion – Critical Essays and Dialogues and Thoughts on
Synthesis
of Science and Religion containing important thoughts from
some of the most
prominent contemporary scientists and thinkers of the world including
several
Nobel Laureates. Srila Prabhupada also instructed Srila Sripad Maharaja
to
publish the Journal of the Bhaktivedanta Institute, Savijnanam.
The title Savijnanam
was given by Srila Prabhupada and was inspired by the Bhagavad-Gita
Verse 7.2:

Translation: I shall now declare unto you in full this
knowledge,
both phenomenal and numinous. This being known, nothing further shall
remain
for you to know.

Srila Prabhupada desired that an academic
journal with
a modern scientific perspective of the divine Bhagavata Paradigm be
published.
Capturing the mood of Srila Prabhupada, the English subtitle, “Scientific Exploration for a Spiritual
Paradigm” has been added. Srila Prabhupada also instructed
Srila Sripad Maharaja
to write a scientific commentary on the Vedanta
Sutra, the topmost philosophical treatise of the Vedic
literatures. In Los
Angeles in 1973, Srila Prabhupada said to Srila Sripad Maharaja, “…we can publish this scientific explanation
of Vedanta Sutra. You have to explain scientifically that a human
beings’ only
business is to inquire about the Absolute Truth. … You have to prove it
logically and scientifically... I will guide you for every sutra.”
Srila
Sripad Maharaja, praying for Srila Prabhupada’s mercy, has very humbly
started
writing a scientific commentary on the Vedanta
Sutra as per Srila Prabhupada’s divine instructions and has
presented his
commentary on the first verse in his article in Savijnanam.
Bhaktivedanta Institute published a book, Bhagavat
Sevarpanam about Srila Sripad
Maharaja’s scientific sankirtan world wide with relevant photos and is
available online at www.bhaktiswarupadamodara.com

Darwin
proposed
that all organisms have descended with modification from a common
ancestor and,
in addition, advocated natural selection as part of the mechanism of
evolution.
During the first half of the 20th century, the
integration of
genetics and population biology into Darwinian evolution led to a
Neo-Darwinian
theory of evolution, also known as Modern Synthesis. Neo-Darwinism
recognized
the importance of mutation and variation within a population. Natural
selection
then became a process that altered the frequency of the appearance of
viable
genes in a population and this defined evolution. The short summary of
this conventional
evolutionary theory, or Darwinism, is: the environment poses problems
and the
organisms posit solutions, of which the best is at last chosen.

With the advancement of
molecular biology the
concept
of chromosome, DNA, RNA, gene, etc. came into the picture. Biologists
believe
that the gene is made up of a specific number and sequence of
nucleotides.
Furthermore, they consider that the sequence of nucleotide reveals the
message
of a gene. In the 1940s, the nexus between genetic information and
proteins was
explained by the ‘one gene one enzyme’ proposition of Beadle and Tatum.
This
nexus was the foundation for the functioning of the genetic code for
amino
acids. The central dogma of molecular biology was first formulated by
Francis
Crick in 1958.[29]
This central dogma attempts to provide a mechanism by which genes could
decide
traits through protein synthesis. This wishful thinking of rigid
mechanism for
a biological system can be sensed from the words of Crick: “a boundless optimism that the basic concepts
involved were rather simple and probably much the same in all living
things.”[30]
It is a vision of oversimplification of the transfer of sequential
information
in an organism. According to this concept, sequential information in
biological
systems can only flow from the gene to the proteins and it cannot be
transferred back from protein to either protein or gene. Following this
idea,
geneticists proclaim that by the assistance of RNA, the structure of
DNA can decide
the structure of proteins.

Central
Dogma: DNA → RNA → Protein (Enzyme) → Trait

This vision of the way DNA worked was
translated into
conventional evolutionary theory, and random mutations were considered
as
copying errors that changed the DNA sequence one base-pair at a time,
and, as a
result, changed protein sequences one amino acid at a time. This scheme
was in
line with the Neo-Darwinian view of gradual accidental change. It also
supplied
a molecular depiction of how proteins, the working molecules of the
cell, could
evolve new structures and functions.[31]
Thus they attempted a total reduction of an organism to its genes,
which they
believed are mere combinations of purposeless molecules. They were
under the
impression that knowledge of genes is the knowledge of the organism.
They
believe that the organism has no control over the alteration process,
and that
the genome mechanically decides an organism’s characteristics. For them
the genome
is a read-only memory (ROM), which is modified only by accident. This
claim of
Darwinists about randomness and accident became dogmatic with the
intent to
reject all possible revivals of the role of a supernatural agent found
in religious
explanations as the cause of origin of diverse living organisms.

Srila Prabhupada once said, “The
evolution theory is there in the Padma Purana. It is not Darwin’s
theory. Darwin stole it from the Padma Purana, and he presented it in a
distorted way with his own imagination. The soul is wandering within
the
different species. This is Vedic knowledge.” For over thirty
years, Srila
Sripad Maharaja has been presenting this Vedic paradigm of evolution of
consciousness versus evolution of species, as per Srila Prabhupada’s
instructions.
These extensive efforts of Bhaktivedanta Institute under the leadership
of
Srila Sripad Maharaja lead to a prominent beginning of the
transformation of material
science into spiritual science.

The last three decades of the 20th
century witnessed
increasing research findings that rigorously challenged the assumptions
of both
Darwinian and Neo-Darwinian theories, which provided the foundations
for most biological
research during that century. Rose and Oakley stated that, “The foundations of that ‘Modernist’ biology
had thus largely crumbled by the start of the 21st
century. This in
turn raises the question of foundations for biology in the 21st
century.”[32]
Despite
the fact that the knowledge of the molecular minutiae of living
organisms is
undergoing a revolutionary growth, unprejudiced consideration of the
consequences of these findings are very rare. A pioneering biologist,
James A.
Shapiro, Professor of Microbiology, University of Chicago, states: “We have progressed from the Constant Genome,
subject only to random, localized changes at a more or less constant
mutation
rate, to the Fluid Genome, subject to episodic, massive and non-random
reorganizations capable of producing new functional architectures.
Inevitably,
such a profound advance in awareness of genetic capabilities will
dramatically
alter our understanding of the evolutionary process. Nonetheless,
neo-Darwinist
writers like Dawkins continue to ignore or trivialize the new knowledge
and
insist on gradualism as the only path for evolutionary change.”[33]
In the same article Shapiro also states that: “The
past five decades of research in genetics and molecular biology
have brought us revolutionary discoveries. Upsetting the oversimplified
views
of cellular organization and function held at mid-century, the
molecular
revolution has revealed an unanticipated realm of complexity and
interaction
more consistent with computer technology than with the mechanical
viewpoint
which dominated the field when the neo-Darwinian Modern Synthesis was
formulated. The conceptual changes in biology are comparable in
magnitude to
the transition from classical physics to relativistic and quantum
physics.”

Research shows that proteins evolve by
accumulating
and rearranging polypeptide domains and not by a series of individual
amino
acid alterations. Hence, the evolutionary genomic alterations are not
stochastic, localized point mutations, but exchanges of DNA encoding
segments.
The DNA substantiation does not verify the slow gathering of random
gradual
changes transmitted by restricted patterns of vertical descent, as
claimed for
50 years by Neo-Darwinian theory.[34]
It is being reported that cells have the ability to modify themselves
adaptively and to change their own heredity. Upsetting the speculations
of the
past mechanistic views, it is well acknowledged that recombination has
the capability
to produce information and to modify the content of the genetic
storage.
Barbara McClintock’s findings have shown that organisms can engineer
their DNA.[35]
Following the same line of research, Shapiro coined the term ‘natural
genetic
engineering’, which corresponds to the ability of living cells to
manipulate
and restructure the DNA molecules that make up their genomes.[36]
Large parts of DNA alteration in bacteria and eukaryotes are a result
of a
coordinated accomplishment of natural genetic engineering. Hence, the
traditional
understanding of genome variation as stochastic events or unpredictable
accidents is now replaced by a controlled and coordinated
accomplishment of
cellular biochemistry. This paradigm shift is a major setback to
Neo-Darwinism,
because cellular biochemistry is based on guided mechanisms and thus
acts in
predictable ways. In contrast to Neo-Darwinism, DNA changes are now
known as
nonrandom with respect to time, physiology and life history.[37]

As a result of all these developments, frontier
biology rejected the dogmatic faith of Darwinists: genome is a
read-only memory
(ROM), which is only modified by accident. The emerging alternative
view of 21st
century biology explains the genome as a read-write memory (RW) system
subject
to nonrandom change by dedicated cell functions. The genome is actively
modified in a coordinated and controlled mode by the sentient cell
functions
and hence new biology views life forms as self-modifying beings. The
ability of
living organisms to modify their own heredity is irrefutable and thus
shows the
failure of the black-box approach of Darwinism in incorporating this
fundamental feature of life.

The declaration of the First
Annual Francis Crick Memorial Conference states, “… the weight of evidence indicates that
humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that
generate
consciousness. Nonhuman animals,
including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including
octopuses,
also possess these neurological substrates.”.[38]
Furthermore, Shapiro states, “Contemporary
research in many laboratories on cell-cell signaling, symbiosis and
pathogenesis show that bacteria utilise sophisticated mechanisms for
intercellular communication and even have the ability to commandeer the
basic
cell biology of 'higher' plants and animals to meet their own needs.
This
remarkable series of observations requires us to revise basic ideas
about
biological information processing and recognise that even
thesmallest cells are
sentient beings.”.[39]
Hence, Darwin’s abiology or molecular view of life has no place in the
frontier
biology. 21st century biology is trying to
understand how the whole
thing is integrated within the cell, how the information is processed
within
the cell and how the cells achieve the needed goal. Cell sensing and
its
molecular bases are all well recognized by 21st
century biology.[40]
Old biology based on the reductionistic approach only helped in knowing
the components
of the cell that are participating in signal transfer and
decision-making, but 21st
century biology focuses on knowing how the whole system works, which we
call a
functional cell. The impasse of the scientific approach is that it
requires a reductionistic
approach to get meaningful answers and make observations. However, when
science
tries to understand those observations, then the reductionistic view
fails to
provide an explanation for the whole picture and seeks the help of an
integrationist
view. Biologists are now certain that there is an interaction between
the participating
members and the whole cell which is far more complex and
multidirectional than what
reductionists believed.

Darwin’s abiology tried to exclude things a
priori,
which is unwanted from a truly scientific point of view and also does
not serve
the purpose of scientific understanding of reality. Modern biologists
are more
broadminded and more open in their approach to finding solutions to
these
problems. Science witnessed that biology evolved from DNA-centrism to
cell-centrism, where cells operate in a sentient manner, which a few
biologists
are trying to compare with information processing; on the other hand,
some try
to see it as computational. However, none of these explanations include
the
sensory feature of how cells act. All these developments give the
impression as
if a cell has thinking or maybe there essentially exists a mind which
is a
vital symptom of cognition. In contrast to Darwinism, scientific
evidences are
forcing the scientists or academically minded people to reconsider the
explanations
on cognition that we find in ancient religious texts.

Srila Sripad Maharaja left for the spiritual
abode on
October 2, 2006. Before his divine departure, Srila Sripad Maharaja
instructed his
scientist disciples to continue the scientific sankirtan services under
the guidance
of his scientist godbrother and senior most member of Bhaktivedanta
Institute, Sripad
Puri Maharaja. Sripad Puri Maharaja is a direct disciple of Srila
Prabhupada
and also Srila Sridhar Maharaja. Sripad
Puri
Maharaja is affectionately training devotees who are approaching him by
the
inspiration of Srila Sripad Maharaja. Under the guidance of Sripad Puri
Maharaja a team of devotee scientists are regularly travelling to
different
colleges and universities to organize seminars and dialogue with
scientists to
convince them about ‘Science of the Soul’ and ‘Science of God’ in a
scientific
language. We are only a handful of devotee-scientists working on this,
and so
many more dedicated souls are needed to carry out this service. Some of
the
ongoing humble services under Sripad Puri Maharaja can be found at:

Srila Sripad Bhaktisvarupa Damodara Goswami Maharaja is Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's scientific ambassador to the world. This humble offering on the occasion of Srila Sripad Maharaja's upcoming 75th appearance day is an attempt to meditate on the mood of Scientific Sankirtan movement of Srila Prabhupada and Srila Sripad Maharaja.

[10] Handler, P. (1970). Biology
and the future of man. Oxford University Press, New York.

[11] Darwin, Charles (1859), On
the origin of species by means of natural selection, or The
preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. 1st
ed., London: John Murray, p. 502, retrieved 2011-03-01.

[37] Shapiro, J.A. (1984). The use of Mudlac
transposons
as tools for vital staining to visualize clonal and non-clonal patterns
of
organization in bacterial growth on agar surfaces. Journal
of General Microbiology, Vol. 130, pp. 1169 - 1181.

[38] The Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness in
Non-Human Animals was publicly proclaimed in Cambridge, UK, on July 7,
2012, at
the conclusion of The First Annual Francis Crick Memorial Conference,
focusing
on "Consciousness in Humans and Non-Human Animals", at Churchill
College, University of Cambridge, by Philip Low, David Edelman and
Christof
Koch. It was written by Philip Low and edited by Jaak Panksepp, Diana
Reiss,
David Edelman, Bruno Van Swinderen, Philip Low, and Christof Koch. The
Declaration was signed by the conference participants that very
evening, in the
presence of Stephen Hawking, in the Balfour Room at the Hotel du Vin in
Cambridge, UK. Refere: http://fcmconference.org